3 Reasons Wikipedia Crushes SEO.

Online Marketing SEO Forums 3 Reasons Wikipedia Crushes SEO.

This topic contains 0 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by JT 4 years, 9 months ago.

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Author
  • #538

    174 Prestige

    Who is the king of SEO? Of all the sites out there, who has the most rankings for the widest range of keywords? Hint, it sounds like “weak pedia”, but they are anything but weak.

    Unequivocally, most search engine optimizers would say Wikipedia. They rank page 1 for a ridiculous amount of keywords, 26 million keywords! In terms of how many rankings they have off of page 1, it gets enormous. No wonder they earn over 6 billion impressions per month!

    Volume of Content

    So how do you get that status on nearly every keyword? Well the biggest and most important factor is the depth and breadth of content. They go into specific, thorough detail about every element of everything on their website. Just search a random animal.

    I just searched ostrich, and guess what? Wikipedia showed up first.

    Well when you open up that page, you find a lot of high quality content about ostriches. More than you ever would want to know, but its at least organized so that if you want to learn something, you can certainly find it.

    You see, Wikipedia has page length and quality requirements. If you create a page on ostriches, and it only has 2 sentences, Wikipedia will tell you to do better. That is the standard.

    Luckily for Findzu, we have a bit of an advantage in terms of building a lot of content. The fact that it is naturally categorized by forums, and we encourage lengthy discussions about topics, we can hopefully fill in all of the content gaps that Google looks for when ranking a term. Theoretically, you could write a decent topic on Findzu that sparks conversation, and the conversation will fill in all of your content gaps for you.

    For your own websites, just remember the length of your articles matters. If you can keep including information, it may be prudent to do so as long as its readable.

    Site Organization and Interlinking

    Wikipedia is the pinnacle of site organization and interlinking for SEO. They encourage users to always link the first instance of a noun with its corresponding Wikipedia page. This insures page authority getting passed around Wikipedia fast and efficiently. If a high-quality site about basketball links to the Wikipedia page on basketball, suddenly that juice is used to influence the basketball’s page ranking, but also every basketball related page on their website, because interlinking signals relevance.

    Unfortunately most user-generated content websites, especially social websites, are unorganized in their content and therefore Google will not rank them despite their volume of content. Google wouldn’t rank a person’s posts high on Google because that person’s wall goes from a picture of their cat to a political rant to a funny music video.

    However forums are different because the discussion is all focused in on a topic, and that topic falls within the greater organization of a forum, which falls into a greater category. This taxonomy will hopefully assist in Wikipedia-like organization.

    Similarly, a lot of writers have great content on their blog, but no organization or structure to tell Google where to look when trying to rank for their queries.

    Effective Headers and Tables

    If you look at a Wikipedia page, they have numerous headers on the page to separate the content into chunks, which is good for the reader and for SEO. Google has gotten quite smart at understanding the readability of content. If you have a giant wall of text with no separation of any kind, Google knows that’s poor user experience.

    To the contrary, Google will see headers as a strong indicator of what the content is about. They then know to digest the page in chunks, that the user might find two or three or four useful concepts about that topic on that page rather than just one rambling concept.

    In order to be an authority, you must provide all of the relevant information, and if the subject is complex Google will look for a more complex page for the more general terms. Going after long-tail keywords you can have a single wall of text page, but for the high traffic general stuff that Wikipedia is an expert on, you need to build huge pages and separate it into digestible chunks.

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.